~ insanitybytes

False Narratives

I thought this was interesting, the usual red pillian characters all got together around a piece of research that helped to confirm their own biases when they twerked it just a bit. Like rote, they all fell into line, one after another. Naturally I attempted to address several of them, primarily because I am a complete moron who always insists on trying to talk to people with their fingers in their ears.

The message they wished to pass along is that women in general are sexually promiscuous and you shouldn’t marry one because it will just end in divorce. Red pillian comedic fodder aside, I actually read a couple of these studies and they just broke my heart.

Naturally the pillians would completely miss the significance, but the first article begins with, “Women who lost their virginity as young teenagers are more likely to divorce – especially if it was unwanted, according to new research.”

Especially if it was unwanted….

We than proceed to, “The study showed, however, that if a young woman made the choice to lose her virginity as a teenager, there was no direct link to a marital split later in life.”

So what the studies actually reveal is that teen age girls who experience unwanted sexual activity, through no choice of their own, tend to have a harder time in longterm marital relationships.

You don’t say?? Like maybe when young girls have negative experiences with men at an early age and are sexually exploited, it inteferes with their future relationship skills, like the ability to trust and respect men perhaps??

I’m telling you, I have to bite my bloody tongue here becasue these are Christian men and I expect better of Christian men and perhaps that’s unfair, perhaps my expectations are too high, but they have been met by others, others who would never dream of being so breath takingly stupid, others who actually have some genuine empathy for their sisters. Sisters, heck, these are our children! These are teen age girls engaging in unwanted sex often with older men. Unwanted. Non consensual. Not of their chosing.

To Deepstrength who has changed his blog name from “Reflections on Christianity and the manosphere” to “Christianity and masculinity,” here is a basic tenet of both, you are called to protect and defend the weak and vulnerable, not to ridicule and mock them.

I know! Sometimes it looks a whole lot like a Monty Python movie. Advance to the rear…..wait what are we even doing? Boldly flee? Who’s on first? If you don’t find away to laugh at the foolishness of it all, you’ll go crazy for sure.

Well, let’s call it what it is. Unwanted sex would have to mean rape or sexual abuse. So why didn’t the article say that in the title? Rape Victims More Likely To Divorce. That would be a more accurate title.

But where are the studies about young men losing their virginity and ending up divorced? I mean, leave out the rape and abuse for the moment, how can a conclusion be drawn about women when there’s no comparative study about men? Maybe it isn’t about women but about when or how an individual first engages in sex. Have the pillians thought about that possibility?

“Maybe it isn’t about women but about when or how an individual first engages in sex. Have the pillians thought about that possibility?”

I’m going with “No.” 🙂

Kind of sad, but I suspect there has to be a whole lot of wounding to compel someone to try to constantly compare themselves to young girls, almost like a plea bargain deal, as if to say, “see, all these girls are far more sinful then we are, so we’re not really so bad.” So all the calls for women to repent become kind of like a projection. It’s not really those lost girls that need to avail themselves of mercy and redemption, or rather if those girls are such a bee in their bonnet, maybe God is trying to tell them something? Like maybe there is something unresolved within them? I look at someone who is lost, broken, and I think “sad, how do we get you healed?” I think that’s the Christian response, not to try and sacrifice them in some sort of plea bargain arrangement with God. I don’t think sin works that way.

You are brave to even venture to such blogs. I’ve tried visiting some of them, but the toxic foams that they emitted were too much for me to able to stand for long. Do they even know what Christianity is about? How can they read about Jesus who said “those who are without sins cast the first stone” and think that with their hate and spite they are living up to his message? It’s so sad and infuriating that they are twisting the bleak results of this study to fatten their own hateful agenda, while obviously love, compassion and understanding are in order.

Wow…yes, heartbreaking…women who have been raped have a hard time later but apparently, in the view of some people, are meant to be demeaned rather than loved, supported, led, and lifted up. I think it’s rather important here to note Romans 16:17,18. We must be wary of and stay away from associations with evil men calling themselves followers of Christ and then spreading false teaching. They are dangerous. In the book of 2nd Timothy there are 4 different places where specific false teachers are called out by name for how wrong they were to warn believers of the specific dangers. These clanging symbols need to be thought of and spoken of in those exact terms and tones. They will not acknowledge that wives are fellow heirs of Christ and to be loved as one’s self. They have no interest in helping women get to heaven or in teaching love, only in entitlement, bigotry, superiority and hate. They are tickling each other’s ears and stroking each other’s egos. But they are not seeking God’s ways.

Considering that these yukkos all seem to be supportive of Brock Turner, we get a fair idea of their circular logic. Whether they’ll admit this or not, the whole idea behind Churchian Game is premised on dysfunctional/damaged women. They simultaneously slut-shame and then teach men to pursue sluts. And then they accuse women of having ‘rationalization hamsters’ lol

Do you really not know the meaning of “twerked”? I presume you mean tweaked.

[I’m going to put “broken” URLs in this comment to avoid issues with too many links.]

Note: I am making absolutely no claims regarding marriage or the likelihood of divorce in this comment.

“So what the studies actually reveal is that teen age girls who experience unwanted sexual activity, through no choice of their own, tend to have a harder time in longterm marital relationships.”

Although I expect that I am “trying to talk to people with their fingers in their ears”, I will try anyway.

You are greatly misunderstanding the data, especially when you consider “unwanted sexual activity” to be “through no choice of their own”.

‘Naturally the pillians would completely miss the significance, but the first article begins with, “Women who lost their virginity as young teenagers are more likely to divorce – especially if it was unwanted, according to new research.”’

First, the interpretation in the article is the journalist’s statement. Journalists are inclined to write according to their own perspective, as you well realize (remember, you just posted about journalists’ lack of skill today).

Second, what is the definition of “unwanted” in the source data? You say you read the studies, but did you go to the source data to understand what the information actually means? Based on your statements regarding unwanted sex, I greatly doubt it.

“I really didn’t want it to happen at the time”– 10.7% for women, 7.9% for men
“I had mixed feelings–part of me wanted it to happen at the time and part of me didn’t” — 51.0% for women, 32.5% for men
“I really wanted it to happen at the time” — 38.4% for women, 59.6% for men

I am fairly certain that the first 2 categories were lumped together as “unwanted” (after all, it was not “really wanted”).

It is important to note the percentage of men whose first sex was “unwanted”. Were they raped, too?

Of females 18-24 years of age in 2011-2013 who have had sex before age 20, percent whose first intercourse was not voluntary: 6.2%

(Based on the question: “Would you say then that this first vaginal intercourse was voluntary or not voluntary, that is, did you choose to have sex of your own free will or not?”)

The most important point here is that voluntary or not is not equivalent to wanted or unwanted. Only 38.4% of women wanted their first sex, but not voluntary first sex was 6.2%. In other words, 55.4% of first sex was not wanted, but it was voluntary, and voluntary means it was by their own choice (of their own free will).

In short, your reference to “unwanted sexual activity, through no choice of their own” is not consistent with the data.

And, “Non consensual. Not of their choosing.” is an incorrect statement for the 94.8% of women who were not raped.

Of lesser importance, you state “These are teen age girls engaging in unwanted sex often with older men.”.

About 74 percent of teen females had a first male sexual partner who was the same age, or 1 to 3 years older, than they were; only 8 percent had a first partner who was 6 or more years older.

Your implication that “older men” are preying on teen-aged girls is not substantiated by the data. Yes, most of the first sex is with a male who is older, but no more than 3 years older. For those girls with a male 3 or more years older, 33% of them “really wanted” to have sex.

First off, I meant twerked, not tweaked, as in a bunch of arrogant and foolish men are out shaking their behinds in the wind.

Second of all, I’m not going to play linky games with you while we throw statistics at one another. Third, unwanted sexual contact with a minor by an older man is statutory rape whether she consented or not.

And lastly “for those girls with a male 3 or more years older, 33% of them “really wanted” to have sex.” Oh I see. So only 77% of them did NOT.

I am not greatly misunderstanding the data. You are greatly misunderstanding the damage and showing your loyalty to the red pill tribe comes before your commitment to the truth.

The really important point is that, per the study itself, voluntary or not is not equivalent to wanted or unwanted.

You are conflating unwanted with involuntary. As a result, some of your conclusions are incorrect.

As to the question of “really wanted” to have sex, I will restate that many male teens (approximately 40%) also did not “really want” to have their first sexual intercourse as teens, but they did. Who sexually exploited them?

I have no idea why Paik’s study was focused on women. I would like to see one that focused on males (or, at least, included them). I suspect that the impact on males is more similar to the impact on females than many would expect. That is, I think that the sexual history of males would have similar results (e.g. divorce likelihood) to that of females.

How fascinating that you would try to make such a distinction. It is also completely irrelevant when it comes to the amount of harm inflicted, in fact, one might even say it is far more harmful for one to engage in “voluntary” unwanted sexual contact because that is evidence someone’s psyche has been so damaged they now believe they desire their own abuse. There’s a recent case of a 13 year old boy molested by his teacher, allegedly got her pregnant, and his parents, the culture, himself are all approving of this relationship that is allegedly wrapped in moral ambiguity. There is no moral ambiguity here, this boy has been exploited, manipulated and preyed upon by multiple adults who have managed to convince him that he desires this theft of who he is as a person. The velvet glove, brainwashing, sexual exploitation, and psychological abuse of this kid is likely going to be far more damaging than an outright violent rape would have been. At least in a violent rape he would have some clear cut evidence that something is all wrong. Instead his abuse has been normalized and worse, he has been convinced it was not only his fault, but that he totally desired it. There is no moral ambiguity here, he was preyed upon by a much older woman who set out to rob him of his mind, body and soul. He has little power in this relationship, there is no equal, he is easily taken advantage of. It’s wrong, it’s always wrong. To then proceed to mock those who have been exploited, to shame them, to act as if they are damaged goods who cause divorce is neither Christian nor masculine.

I would be amazed that you are fascinated by this undeniable distinction, if not for the fact that you often show a willingness to interpret words in a peculiar fashion, and, at times, even create your own unique definitions.

Let’s look at this in another context. On any given day, many people do not want to go to work, but they do voluntarily choose to go to work of their own free will,. That is, choosing to do something is not the same as wanting to do it. Again, voluntary or not is not equivalent to wanted or unwanted.

Your example of the 13-year-old boy molested by his teacher is an outlier. It should not be ignored, but it is far from the norm. The vast majority of teen-aged sex is with a partner less than 3 years different in age, and the sex is primarily voluntary even when it is not “really wanted”. This is true for both males and females (admittedly, the males are more likely to “really want” sex).

The damage resulting from the general societal acceptance of sex outside of marriage is much greater than is generally believed. Until this returns to God’s standard, there will no doubt be many negative consequences.

I do not believe that divorce is caused by women (or men) who have had sex before the marriage. However, there is a correlation between sex before marriage and likelihood of divorce. Both parties to a marriage need to be aware of the other’s sexual past and the impact it could have on their marriage. (Note: Other factors also increase the likelihood of divorce and should be considered before entering into marriage.)

OKR, most of your discussion with IB here is being spoken in two different languages. So I have no desire to try to sort out the massive differences in perspective that are preventing productive discussion. But I do want to respectfully suggest two things to you that you can, of course, take or leave.

One, now that I’ve looked at the CDC data I’d say that you might be wise to view it with a bit more skepticism rather than viewing there study as solid and well done.

And two, I’d suggest that molestation is not an outlier in our society. It’s an under reported, rarely understood problem that is happening at a terrible and frightening rate. It is poorly questioned in studies. And it is often less than realistic to expect to be able to,question it well in such a study because the victims so often talk themselves out of seeing it as it really is. It’s not an outlier that I was molested by a teenage boy when I was five or six, it’s actually very common. It’s not an outlier that I was molested by an 18 year old when I was 12. It’s actually very common. The details can vary widely from one person’s story to another but it’s also not uncommon that some are stories with a few similar details where a girl at 12 already looks likes she’s 20 and people actually give in to that shallow and stupid way of thinking that tempts them to side with pretending that is some kind of mitigating factor and that the 18 year old was perfectly understandable in his sins. Sadly it’s no outlier that victims of molestation have experienced sexual pleasure as a part of the experience. It’s part of why it’s all so terribly psychologically, emotionally, and spiritually damaging. It’s not an outlier that I was grabbed and fondue led out of the blue by a man in his fifties or sixties when I was 17. It is an outlier that on top of fighting him off I also went after him (on the phone that his wife had just answered and passed to him) psychologically a few days later and threatened to destroy his life in a way that successfully scared the living daylight savings out of him. Sexual immorality is rampant and it involves children quite often. It always involves an abuse of one sort or another even when both parties are guilty. And there is no love unless it is modeled on Biblical love where men and women alike can be loved by God and can strive to do right and to want heaven for themselves and each other. People have to seek a clean heart and a reconciled relationship with God for themselves and for their loved ones and even think of the need for that of other people who they might be tempted to commit sexually immoral acts with, who they might know to have no interest in God. It is still never OK to contribute to their spiritual damage or participate with it. Otherwise it’s all just selfish and damaged and damaging and broken.

If you are suggesting that a difference in understanding of the words unwanted and involuntary is speaking two different languages, I will disagree. While it is reasonably likely that many people will consider them to be almost synonymous, it is not true. If you don’t understand the difference, then the rest of this comment is unlikely to be of any consequence.

I see no problem with the CDC data. Please provide guidance on your concerns so that I am able to recognize them.

“And two, I’d suggest that molestation is not an outlier in our society. It’s an under reported, rarely understood problem that is happening at a terrible and frightening rate. It is poorly questioned in studies.”

I did not state that molestation is an outlier in our society. I stated that IB’s example was an outlier. If she wants to make a point, make it direct. Using an outlier is not an effective way to do that.

I am very sorry that you are a victim of multiple instances of sexual abuse.

However, specific cases influence me less than statistics based on credible data. Your statement didn’t help. Of course, molestation is under-reported to the authorities for many reasons. This would not be known if there were no studies on the subject, but there are. They are not perfect, of course, but molestation is readily recognized by researchers, but not by the general public. The biggest problem is that the media does not cover this issue much.

Now, actually, I was already aware of the problem of sexual abuse of children. Since you didn’t provide it, I will give some information and statistics on sexual abuse of children. (Perhaps you’ll want to discount it as much of this data comes from the CDC?)

“An estimated 25% of girls and 16% of boys experience sexual abuse before they are 18 years old. Statistics for boys may be falsely low because of reporting techniques. (Ann Botash, MD, in Pediatric Annual, May 1997.)”

“Compared with those who did not report CSA (childhood sexual abuse), men and women exposed to CSA were at a 40% increased risk of marrying an alcoholic, and a 40% to 50% increased risk of reporting current problems with their marriage.”

“Health Impacts of Child Abuse (https://www.childhelp.org/child-abuse-statistics/)
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention links adverse childhood experiences (which include other household dysfunctions along with abuse and neglect) with a range of long-term health impacts.

Individuals who reported six or more adverse childhood experiences had an average life expectancy two decades shorter than those who reported none.

These statements show that the level of childhood sexual abuse is significant (huge), and there are many negative consequences associated with it.

Looking at the above list of Sexual and Reproductive Health Issues and Risk Factors, it is apparent that there is a correlation between childhood sexual abuse and sexual activity. It seems reasonably likely that childhood sexual abuse is positively correlated with a greater likelihood of teen-aged sex, and thus with greater likelihood of later divorce.

Does this mean that teens may be having sex without really understanding why? I would say this is true.

Does childhood sexual abuse and teen-aged sex impact marriage and increase the likelihood of divorce? I would say this is also true.

Should these behaviors be disclosed to a potential spouse? Yes, they should. They increase the likelihood that there will be problems in the marriage, and that divorce will occur.

All people should be Christian, love one another, and sex should only be in marriage. Until the day comes when this is true, then we will continue to have many, many problems.

No, I was not suggesting that those two words were the sum total representation of the poor communication nor even that they were representative of it at all. You seem to have an agenda to push that has little to do with communicating well with IB. You make many assumptions and allusions and do little to clarify them. Youve twice now dismissed an example as an outlier and twice left your own determination to dismiss it looking completely unsupported and and unexplained. It leaves your dismissal looking all the more as though it’s just agenda driven. Even the data you went on to post admitted that plenty of boys are molested and mentioned that they may need to be considered as underreport more than molestations with female victims. That is my impression as well. But in any case the lack of communication is what makes me unable to know any place to go with the rest of your comment. I guess you’ve clarified your great respect for all things CDC or all data you can quote or something, just I’ve already expressed my lack of respect in so far as using it in the way it’s been used in the blogs that I’ve now had the misfortune to follow links to. And I have no interest in debating CDC data collection, analyzing and reporting methods. And I have no interest in a bunch of men bloggers stroking each other and claiming yet another way they can say how wrong or dangerous women are to men. Men need purity as much as women do. Period. There are some good men here in this broken world and I’ll stick with those uplifting and Godly bloggers and preachers such as I can find.

The Center for Disease Control believes in same-sex marriage; believes that gender is a social construct; and that drugs like Ritalin and Adderall are perfectly safe to give to children. Anything they have to say about Sexual Psychology is useless.

Personal beliefs do not alter data, but do influence interpretation of the data. The CDC data was interpreted in the studies that were referenced. And then interpreted again by journalists, bloggers, commenters, etc.

If you have a better data source than the CDC, please let me know what it is.